Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs Strategic Planning Workshop

Meeting report

Chairperson’s opening remarks
The Chairperson said that Chairperson of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Board could not be present as scheduled, but the workshop would proceed nonetheless. The Minister of the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) also could not attend due to a meeting. The aim of the workshop was to get a broad, high-level sense of what the Department planned for the new financial year in terms of programmatic areas. Parliament also needed to be clear on what they would be occupied with for the year.

It was important to engage with South African society on matters which were environmental. This was a specialised sector but South Africans needed to engage in discourse and discussion on these environmental matters in a broad sense. Parliament was also an institution of the people, so the programme needed to ensure people got talking on environmental matters. This could concern matters such as wildlife crime, the health impacts of mine dumps, invasive species, managing oceans and coasts etc. It was important that these issues were not just discussed by a few elite in Parliamentary rooms or government. This also involved localising the COP21, Paris agreement, which was steeped in a legislative framework. For this, communities needed to be active in climate change.

Matters of environment, by their very nature, were cross-cutting and could not be the sole responsibility of the Committee. The question was how to create a Parliamentary framework of cooperation and collaboration between Committees on such cross-cutting issues like energy, mining, transport, agriculture etc. – these were areas needing collaboration. Another factor was that the implementation of policies resided elsewhere, like fighting wildlife crime, which required working with other structures. It was therefore in the interests of Parliament to create such a framework to ensure everyone did not work in isolation. The Committee also did not have any meaningful interaction with the Select Committee that also dealt with matters of the environment. To ensure collaborative working with the NCOP was vital to get better results.

The sector also needed to interact with non-governmental organisations (NGOs), community-based organisation (CBOs) and academics whose work was centred on the environment. Parliament needed to engage with these platforms on their thinking of how to move SA in the area of the environment. This would also inform the Committee’s interaction with the Department. When some Members had started the Fifth Parliament, they had known nothing about El Nino, invasive species and climate change, etc. Members had learnt so much, but learning by its very nature was continuous.

Deputy Minister: Strategic focus of Department for next four years
Ms Barbara Thomson, Deputy Minister of Environmental Affairs, said the priorities of the Department would be outlined in the presentations to follow. These priorities had been informed by the State of the Nation Address, and aimed to implement the National Development Plan (NDP). In this implementation, it was important to ensure that earth and its resources were protected – this was key to the Department. It was also important that work going forward was informed by this strategic workshop. Thought should also go into the development of a tool to ensure that plans and implementation were on track. 

Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA): Annual Performance Plan overview
Ms Nosipho Ngcaba, Director General, DEA, began by looking at the macroeconomic environment and its impact.

The global economic environment was currently unfavourable for the implementation of the NDP:

• The global economy grew by 3.4% in 2014 and SA’s main trading partners had experienced divergent growth. The European Union (EU) had grown by 0.9% while Japan had shrunk by 0.1%.
• Sub-Saharan Africa had grown by 5% and the US by a robust 2.4%.
• China continued to slow down, with growth moderating to a still impressive 7.4%.
• Commodity prices of iron-ore, coal, platinum and oil were still well below their 2008 highs and continued to reflect slow growth.
• The substantial drop in the international oil price had brought benefits for SA but it would reduce growth in oil-producing African countries which were key destinations for SA manufactured exports.
• The overall global outlook was still uncertain, with gross domestic product (GDP) projections being revised downwards by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Therefore, SA could not depend on global growth alone to catalyse domestic growth

In terms of the performance of SA’s economy, SA was amongst the lowest growth performers in the world. Its economy had grown by 1.5% in 2014, agriculture had grown by 5.6% and services by 2.1%, but mining had shrunk by 1.6% and manufacturing had been flat. Unemployment was highest out of the emerging markets. SA had been projected to grow by 2.2% to 2.5%, in 2014 were it not for labour and electricity stoppages

The government balance sheet had also deteriorated:

• there was limited room for counter cyclical fiscal support.
• government debt was approaching R2 trillion.
• the debt to GDP ratio was expected to peak at just below 45% (from just under 25% in 2008).
• debt had been raised to respond to the crisis and was due for repayment.
• there would R80 million redemption a year on average in the coming five years (less than 1% growth).
• food prices were rising, there was serious drought and above inflation wage agreements in the public sector.

Ms Ngcaba then outlined environmental challenges. According to the 2006 SA Environmental Outlook (SAEO), the 2012 SAEO and the 2013 Organisation for Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD), SA’s environmental performance review and the overall condition of SA’s environment continued to deteriorate:

• SA was one of the most energy and carbon-intensive economies in the world.
• It had an over-reliance on natural resources.
• mining was poorly regulated, resulting in serious environmental damage.
• There was high pressure on limited water resources.
• Poor environmental quality and access to environmental services (sanitation, waste collection and healthy housing) affected health, especially in children.
• There was increasing illegal poaching, wildlife trade and damage by invasive species.
• The slowdown in growth, following the global economic crisis, exacerbated unemployment challenges and inequality, which were already among the highest in the world, while life expectancy was two-thirds the OECD average.   

Ms Ngcaba took the Committee through the problems/challenges and critical sector outputs in response. Some of the challenges included the fact that SA was the world’s twelfth largest carbon dioxide emitter and creator of air pollution which resulted in exposure to unsafe ambient pollutant concentrations and associated health effects, poor environmental quality and access to environmental services, specifically waste services, and the impact of mining activities on the environmental and natural resources. Other challenges noted included land degradation and soil erosion, loss of wetlands, high pollution levels around coastal metropolitan areas and exploitation of marine resources. 

Another challenge was that of the current drought and related impacts. The El Nino phenomenon was the result of the heating of the Pacific Ocean. It induced above normal dry conditions in some parts of the world (Southern Africa and Australia) and above normal wet conditions in other parts of the world (South America) and was likely to last for the summer season. This impacted water, agriculture, human health, disaster management, biodiversity and ecosystems and human settlements and livelihoods.

SA had positions in a number of multilateral engagements in relation to:

• Outcomes of the UN General Assembly (UNGA): Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
• Link or relevance to other Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) and national programmes (management of data).
• UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) COP12 in Ankara, Turkey.
• UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) COP 21 (Paris).
• Chemicals Protocol Meeting of the Parties (MOP) in Dubai.
• Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) COP 17, 2016 in SA
• Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP in Cancun - Mexico 2016

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with 169 targets on economic, social and environmental aspects from a developing country perspective, were pro-development and focused on ending poverty, achieving shared prosperity, and protecting the planet. There was a political commitment to end poverty and hunger everywhere; to build peaceful, just and inclusive societies; to protect human rights and promote gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls; and to ensure the lasting protection of the planet and its natural resources.

The SDGs linked to environmental management included poverty eradication, which was the overarching objective of the post 2015 development agenda. Goals 12 to 15 were specifically environment focused, to ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns; to take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts; to conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development; to protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss

The DEA was developing an SDG implementation plan for the environment sector, and was already consulting with civil society, business and the private sector. Data was to be comparable, reliable, and timely to measure green growth and environmental integrity.

Ms Ngcaba said addressing challenges around the scarcity of natural resources, environmental degradation, pollution, invasive species and climate change while ensuring socio-economic benefits for communities was paramount. This involved:

• Attitudes, behaviours and investment decisions in relation to water use.
• Water efficient devices (when purchasing) and a water conservation campaign.
• Rain water harvesting and recycling of waste water.
• Determinants of waste generation, separation of recyclables and waste prevention behaviours (pay as you throw waste charge, linked to materials separation).
• Waste charge, combined with separation, required door-to-door / localised collection for all separated materials -- focused on recyclables away from the mixed waste stream – and was understood to be the most expensive to implement.
• Separation rates to be studied, to confirm achievement of objectives.
• Socio-economic factors and waste generation, taking into account income and household size.
• Drivers of waste prevention, such as composting and reusable shopping bags.

In terms of the departmental strategy map, the departmental strategic direction sought to respond to the identified pressures and commitments taking into consideration the following existing opportunities:

• Rich biodiversity and exceptional ecosystems and habitats
• Abundant non-renewable energy and mineral resources
• The fastest growing renewable energy market in the G20 and the 9th leading destination of clean energy investment
• Green growth opportunities from wildlife game farming, ecotourism, energy efficiency measures and innovation
• A comprehensive policy and regulatory framework for protecting the environment and managing natural resources

After going through the outcome-based DEA map, Members were informed of the 2016/17 priorities per programme of the Department.

1. Programme One: Administration:
   1. Implementation of the local government support strategy;
   2. Outcome 10 implementation/monitoring (2016/17 progress reports);
   3. Implementation of 2016/17 draft environmental key days and conference calendar.
       
2. Programme Two: Legal Authorisations and Compliance Enforcement:
   1. Environmental management inspectors’ (EMI) capacity, including local authorities;
   2. Wildlife crime: a particular focus on rhino, cycads, predators, and wildlife trafficking, in collaboration with other law enforcement institutions.
   3. Compliance and enforcement information management: development / integration of systems;
   4. Consideration of legislation submitted in terms of the Legislative Programme 2016/2017.
       
3. Programme Three: Oceans and Coasts
   1. Development of estuaries management plans and water pollution monitoring;
   2. Draft coastal waters discharge regulations developed;
   3. Draft regulations pertaining to reclamation of land from coastal waters developed.
       
4. Programme Four: Climate Change and Air Quality
   1. National framework for climate services established;
   2. Drought measures and adaptation strategies;
   3. Climate change adaptation strategies;
   4. Functional climate change research network in place by 2019;
   5. Strategy to address air pollution in dense low-income communities;
   6. SA Atmospheric Emissions Licensing and Inventory Portal (SAAELIP) functional and producing status reports to enable transparency in service delivery;
   7. Monitoring implementation of the air quality sector performance measures.
       
5. Programme Five: Biodiversity and Conservation:
   1. Expansion and effective management of the conservation estate;
   2. Enhancement of management effectiveness;
   3. Sustainable use of ecosystems and species;
   4. Implementation of a biodiversity economy strategy;
   5. Mitigation of threats to biodiversity and ecosystems;
   6. Legislative and other tools for species and ecosystem protection/management.
       
6. Programme Six: Environmental Programmes
   1. Strengthen the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) environment and culture sector coordination and performance;
   2. National green jobs index;
   3. Number of derelict and ownerless mines rehabilitated and closed in line with environmental best practice;
   4. Coordinated Integrated Permitting System (CIPS) and screening tool;
   5. Rationalisation and harmonisation of environmental regulatory system;
   6. Derelict and ownerless mines rehabilitated and closed in line with environmental best practice;
   7. Mining Phakisa.
   8.  
7. Programme Seven: Chemicals and Waste Management:
   1. Recycling enterprise development programme;
   2. Industry waste management plan.

DEA 2016/17 Annual Performance Plan (APP)
Ms Ngcaba took the Committee through the detailed 2016/17 APP, beginning with an overview of the DEA programme structure:

Administration:
Provide leadership, strategic centralised administration and executive support, corporate services and facilitate effective cooperative governance, and environmental education and awareness.
 
Legal, Authorisations and Compliance:
Promote the development of an enabling legal regime and licensing/authorisation system that will promote enforcement and compliance.

Oceans and Coasts:
Promote, manage and provide strategic leadership on oceans and coastal conservation.

Climate Change and Air Quality Management:
Improve air and atmospheric quality, lead and support, inform, monitor and report efficient and effective international, national and significant provincial and local responses to climate change (South African Weather Service).

Biodiversity and Conservation:
Ensure the regulation and management of all biodiversity, heritage and conservation matters in a manner that facilitated sustainable economic growth and development.(South African National Parks, South African National Biodiversity Institute, Isimangaliso Wetland Authority Park).

Environmental Programmes:
Implement expanded public works and green economy projects in the environmental sector.

Chemicals and Waste Management:
Manage and ensure that chemicals and waste management policies and legislation were implemented and enforced in compliance with chemicals and waste management authorisations, directives and agreements.

The presentation continued to look at the strategic objectives of each programme, performance indicators, baselines and targets for 2016/17.

Preparations for CITES COP17
Mr Shonisani Munzhedzi, Deputy Director General (DDG): Biodiversity and Conservation, DEA, began by outlining that the Convention on International Trade and Endangered Species (CITES) aimed to ensure that international trade in CITES-listed species was sustainable and not detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild. CITES-listed species were categorised in three appendices according to the extent to which they were threatened. CITES member countries and observers met approximately every three years to review the implementation of the Convention. At such meetings, member countries also considered and adopted amendments to the lists of species in Appendices I and II.

South Africa had ratified CITES in 1975 and was one of the 182 current signatories to CITES, which was a powerful tool for biodiversity conservation and regulation of international trade in wild fauna and flora. It regulated international trade in over 35 000 species of plants and animals, including their products and derivatives. Benefits included ensuring the survival of species, facilitation of sustainable use and support of economic development and livelihoods. This was the first CoP hosted on the African continent since the year 2000 -- previous host countries in Africa had included Botswana, Zimbabwe and Kenya -- and 2 000 participants were expected. COP17 would be hosted in the city of Johannesburg at the Sandton Convention Centre from 24 September to 5 October 2016. Standing committees would be held on 23 September and 5 October 2016.

Possible proposals to amend the appendices, but not initiated by South Africa, included:

• Kenya indicated that it will submit a proposal to list lion in Appendix I;
• African grey Parrot: Appendix I (Ghana);
• African elephant – African elephant coalition: amendment to annotation;
• Shark proposals, to list sharks in Appendix II (Silky shark and Thresher shark).

South African proposals to be submitted, subject to Cabinet approval, included:

• Cape mountain zebra – Proposed to down list to Appendix II, based on non-detriment finding: scientific authority;
• Siphonochilus aethiopicus (wild ginger) – Proposed listing Appendix II,based on work done by SA National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI).
• Pangolin: Proposed listing in Appendix I.

Trade in hunting trophies of species listed in Appendix II

• Sought to clarify the uniform interpretation of the Convention with regards to hunting trophies,
• Emphasising “the contribution of hunting to conservation, socio-economic beneficiation and to provide incentives for people to conserve wildlife”

Illegal wildlife trade highlighted the need for:

• International cooperation;
• The sharing of best practices and enforcement resources;
• The mobilisation of funds for sustainable interventions in order to combat illegal wildlife trade in CITES listed species; 
• Emphasising the important role played by local communities

Mr Munzhedzi outlined possible agenda items for CoP17, including administrative, strategic and interpretation and implementation matters. Also under discussion would be the maintenance and amendment of the appendices.

Convention on Biological Diversity
Mr Munzhedzi took the Committee through the Convention for Biological Diversity, highlighting the three Rio Conventions -- the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and Convention for Biological Diversity (CBD).

The CBD was an international legally-binding biodiversity treaty with three main goals -- conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilisation of genetic resources. Its overall objective was to encourage actions which would lead to a sustainable future. There were 193 parties to the Convention. SA had become a party on 31 January 1996. Three protocols had been adopted in the framework of the Convention, namely:

1. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety;
2. The Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety;
3. The Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing.

The National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act (NEMBA) had been aligned to the CBD, with the same objectives.  

Mr Munzhedzi outlined the highlights of the CBD. It had met 12 times and adopted over 100 decisions; COP 11 – held in October 2012 in Hyderabad, India – had marked the move from policy-making to implementation; National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) were the principal instruments for implementing the Convention at the national level; SA had published its first NBSAP in 2004 and had just completed the updated NBSAP in line with the strategic plan. COP 13 would take place in December 2016 in Cancun, Mexico.

COP 10 had adopted the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and progress in the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 at each of its meetings to 2020. It served as a flexible framework for the establishment of national and regional targets and promoted the coherent and effective implementation of the three objectives of the CBD. The 2050 vision was that biodiversity was valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, ecosystem services were maintained, a healthy planet was sustained and essential benefits were delivered for all people. The five strategic goals included:

• Addressing the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society;
• Reducing the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use;
• Improving the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity;
• enhancing the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services;
• enhancing implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building.

Moving on to CBD COP13, key issues to emerge had included:

• An interim review of progress towards the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the achievement of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, and related means of implementation:
  • Resource mobilisation for the plan;
  • The fourth global biodiversity outlook from national reports indicated insufficient progress.
• Marine and coastal biodiversity:
  • The identification of ecologically or biologically significant marine areas and jurisdiction.
• Synthetic biology:
  • Potential for developed vs developing country interests and readiness to adopt the technology.
• Biodiversity and climate change:
  • Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) and synergy with other conventions, additional burden to developing countries.
• Protected areas and ecosystem restoration:
  • Setting of ambitious targets that required additional resources and capacity.
• Mainstreaming of biodiversity across sectors, including agriculture, forests and fisheries.

Mr Munzhedzi said that political issues included:

• Resourcing the strategic plan and biodiversity targets (financial and technical support);
• Enhancing compliance to obligations, including payment of arrears for annual dues;
• Administrative burdens and targets that conflicted with national priorities;
• Coordination of the Africa Group, providing leadership and addressing controversial issues such as genetically modified organisms and synthetic biology;
• Ecologically or biologically significant marine areas in the context of marine protected areas,  expansion and the ocean economy;
• Climate change negotiations complicating CBD discussions, and ensuring synergies in positions taken;
• Balancing sustainable use and conservation.

In terms of Land Degradation Neutrality (LDN), in September 2015 the UN General Assembly had adopted SDG 15, which read: “Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.” Its target 15.3 read: “By 2030, combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, including land affected by desertification, drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land degradation-neutral world”. At the 12th session of the Conference of Parties (COP 12) of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), country parties reached a breakthrough agreement by linking implementation of the Convention to the SDGs.

Achieving LDN would require a paradigm shift in land stewardship i.e. from “degrade-abandon-migrate” to “protect-sustain-restore”. The LDN target would require an appropriate mix of policy instruments that would be monitored and assessed on the basis of the agreed upon indicators. LDN would add value by providing a strategic framework for Sustainable Land Management (SLM) policies, ensuring complementarity and coherence in addressing Desertification Land Degradation and Drought (DLDD), ensuring predictability and concerted action and stimulating action at all levels of governance. An LDN world was simply a world where one prevented or avoided the degradation of healthy and productive lands through sustainable land and forestry management practices, including agroforestry, sustainable agriculture and livestock practices, water management, and soil conservation, and -- where feasible -- regenerated land that was already degraded.

What did LDN mean for South Africa? The benefits of achieving LDN through an integrated landscape approach would address: food security and hunger, poverty, resilience to drought and water stress, reduced carbon emissions, environmentally induced migration, opportunities to invest for the people living in the degraded lands and provide alternatives to biomass, biodiversity loss through improvement of land ecosystems conditions, and promote synergies 

Outcomes of COP21 and Meeting of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP 11)
Ms Judy Beaumont, DDG: Climate Change and Air Quality, DEA, provided feedback to the Committee on the outcomes of the 21st Session of the Conference of Parties (COP 21) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 11th Session of the Conference of Parties serving as the Meeting of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP 11). By way of background, the UNFCCC COP17 in Durban had set up a four-year negotiation process for a new agreement to be reached in 2015, to apply to global emissions after 2020, and increase the international effort to limit emissions up to 2020, i.e. the Durban Platform.

After outlining the progress made towards COP21 in Paris last year, the Committee was informed of the key issues in the UNFCCC COP21 negotiations. These key issues included:

• To fulfil the Durban mandate by adopting a new legally binding agreement for implementation from the year 2020;
• To address the ambition gaps in the pre-2020 period;
• How to reflect the principle of common but differentiated responsibility and respective capabilities;
• Parity between mitigation and adaptation;
• How to address the means of implementation in the areas of finance, technology and capacity building;
• Strengthening and enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of climate action through provisions to strengthen institutional linkages between various mechanisms created under the UNFCCC -- for example, between the Adaptation Committee and the Technology Executive Committee with the Standing Committee on Finance and the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and other operating entities of the Convention’s Financial Mechanism;
• Concluding the rules for the second commitment of the Kyoto Protocol;
• How to locate the Response Measure Forum and Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage.

In terms of SA’s position, as the originator of the Durban Mandate, under which the Paris negotiations took place, SA sought to contribute constructively towards the success of the Paris COP by:

• Having a clear mandate to defend the Convention’s core principles of equity and differentiation, in line with SA’s national interest as an African developing country that required support post-2020.
• As the chair of the G77 and China comprising of 134 countries, SA sought to maintain and strengthen the unity of developing countries.
• Give equal priority to adaptation and mitigation with a balanced provision of means of implementation.
• SA, as a vulnerable country, was to adopt an agreement in Paris that was fair, ambitious and science-based, and which protected the development space of developing countries.
• Adopt an adequate-to-keep temperature increase below 2 degrees Celsius.
• An agreement that was equitable by reflecting differentiation through designing effective commitments and actions, by following the structure of the Convention for formulation of common and individual commitments.
• Ensuring pathways to reaching US$100 billion climate finance by 2020, and address post 2020 finance.
• Ensure that the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage to the impacts of climate change, received a mandate to continue beyond 2017.
• Adoption of Kyoto Protocol 2 (KP2) rules to enable ratification of the KP2 and its entry into force.
• Ensure the continuation of the Forum on Response Measures, to develop a system for more cooperation where developed countries cannot take unilateral measures in their decisions to address climate change, with negative consequences on developing countries and just transitions for the work force that will be affected.
• Establishment of a permanent institutional arrangement under the Convention for effective implementation and monitoring of all the activities on capacity-building, including linkages between adaptation, mitigation, technology and financial systems.

Ms Beaumont outlined the key outcomes:

• COP 21 in Paris was universally regarded as a seminal point in the development of the international climate change regime under the UNFCCC, concluding as it did with the Paris Agreement (PA).
• The PA was a comprehensive framework which would guide international efforts to limit Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and to meet all the associated challenges posed by climate change.
• The PA did not provide much of the detail necessary for its implementation. This detail would instead be negotiated by parties over the next five years through the ad hoc working group on the Paris Agreement.
• SA played a central and constructive role in its capacity as Chair of the Group of 77, as well as in its national capacity.

In terms of the Paris outcome, a strong political signal had been sent. 187 countries had submitted Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) covering some 97% or global GHG emissions, and 150 leaders had attended the opening session. There had been an internationally binding agreement which, however, followed a hybrid model. Global goals had included temperature increase well below 2 degrees C, pursuing efforts toward 1,5 degrees C; global peaking linked to costs of adaptation and increasing adaptation capability; international climate finance levels consistent with local economic development strategies (LEDS) and resilience; and implemented to reflect equity and Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR&RC), in light of national circumstances.

A number of areas for mitigation had been listed, including:

• Based on Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) (bottom-up), with a legal commitment to submit NDC’s every five years (top-down), and a public registry of NDC’s.
• Principle of a progressive increase in levels of ambition (top-down);
• REDD+ continuation (tools);
• Cooperative market and non market mechanisms (tools).

Areas for adaptation included:

• Global challenge of adaptation linked to mitigation ambition levels;
• Recognition of adaptation as a global contribution;
• Public registry of adaptation contributions;
• Report internationally (top-down)

Loss and Damage (L&D):

• Continuation and enhancement of the Warsaw L&D mechanism
• International cooperation and support for L&D

Finance:

• DC’s “shall” provide finance for mitigation and adaptation (top-down);
• Biennial communication of finance contributions

Technology:

• Continuation of the technology mechanism
• Overarching Technology Framework
• Finance for innovation
• Commitment to international technology cooperation

Capacity Building:

• Adopted at CMA 1, the Paris Committee on Capacity Building, or other institutional arrangement
• International capacity building cooperation
• Enhanced EE and public awareness
• Communication of capacity building action

Transparency:

• Enhanced transparency framework based on existing reporting
• Tracking mitigation, adaptation and support provided and received
• Country performance reports undergo technical review
• Country reports subject to multilateral consideration
• Still to negotiate detailed rules prior to 2020 (top-down)

Review of adequacy – Global Stock Take:

• Assess collective progress to inform NDC’s every five years
• Covers mitigation, adaptation and MoI

Compliance:

• Facilitative compliance mechanism
• Comprised of experts
• Still to negotiate detailed modalities, procedures and rules prior to 2020 (top-down)

Entry into force:

• 55 countries and 55% of world emissions

Ms Beaumont said the pre-2020 - CMP 11 had concluded the rule set for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. The CMP had also concluded a review of the modalities and procedures for the clean development mechanism, which would make it easier for countries in Africa to implement the CDM. A technical process on adaptation to identify concrete opportunities for strengthening resilience had been established, reducing vulnerabilities and increasing the implementation of adaptation actions in the pre-2020 period. Financial pledges had been made to the Adaptation Fund to the tune of $75 million, and financial pledges of $248 million had also been made to the Least Developed Countries Fund.

Implications were that the Paris Agreement represented a turning point in global climate governance and strengthened rules-based multilateralism. The Agreement did not rewrite or reinterpret the UNFCCC. The Agreement served as a model for consensus based multilateral decision making. The Paris Agreement would be opened for signature from 22 April 2016, and thereafter parties would ratify it between 21 April 2017 and 2020. It would enter into force, 30 days after 55 parties, covering 55% of the total global GHG emissions, had ratified it.

SA was already acting, and had long been doing so, to build the nation’s resilience to the impacts of climate change, and to accelerate its transition to a lower carbon economy and society. Significant investment in renewable energy, public transport, energy efficiency, waste management and land restoration initiatives country wide, had been made in order to reduce GHG emissions’ intensity in our economy. All spheres of government were refining their strategies for adapting to the impacts of climate change and for enhancing the capacity of institutions, services, infrastructure, human settlements and ecosystem services to respond and bounce back from the impacts of climate change.

The Paris Agreement required SA to implement a five-year emission reduction cycle that:

(i) Set carbon budgets for companies whose production processes were carbon intense;

(ii) Required such companies to submit plans that demonstrated how they would meet their targets;

(iii) Required companies to report regularly on their GHG emissions, for the compilation of the national GHG emissions inventory.

SA and all other countries would have to report on the implementation of the NDC and update or communicate a new NDC every five years. The country would also have to formulate and communicate, by 2020, and mid-century, on long-term low GHG emission development strategies. The Paris Agreement also required SA to:

(i) Strengthen its work on developing a national strategy for adapting to the impacts of climate change;

(ii) Strengthen its early warning systems;

(iii) Strengthen its institutional capacity to respond to extreme events, such as droughts and floods, and slow onset events, such as shifting rainfall patterns that had an impact on crop production.

SA would also have to submit adaptation communications periodically, which included national priorities, implementation, plans and support needed. Finally, the country needed to increase the pace of implementation as agreed during the National Climate Change Dialogue that it had hosted in 2014, through flagship programmes. All of this work was well under way, in collaboration with the relevant sector departments and research institutions, in consultation with all stakeholders.

It was recommended that the Committee note the outcomes of COP 21 to the UNFCCC and the 11th Session of the Conference of Parties serving as the Meeting of Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP 11).

Discussion
The Chairperson reiterated that the presentations were there to inform how the Committee would interact with the Department moving forward on these various matters -- more so on the high-level issues, and less so on the day-to-day work of the Department. It was clear the Committee needed to look more closely at multi-lateral engagements.

Mr T Hadebe (DA) appreciated that the DG’s presentation had covered critical issues moving into the new financial year. He commended the focus on provincial and local government responsibilities, as well as the focus applied to the challenge of drought – the Department was on the right track. His only question was whether there was sufficient funding for the Department to carry out its responsibilities.

Ms Ngcaba responded that the DEA did not have enough resources to deal with the challenges at hand in totality, but the APP worked within the available resources.

Mr S Mabilo (ANC) thought the plans, responsibilities and tasks of the Department and its programmes were clear. He appreciated the detailed information on CITES, which better equipped Members regarding the latest developments. This was a clearly functioning Department at both the political and administrative level.

Mr Z Makhubele (ANC) said that the presentations had covered a wide range of issues which assisted the Committee in keeping the Department accountable. The repeated mention made of relevant sector departments illustrated the importance of the Committee collaborating with other relevant Committees to get a sense of what these other Departments were doing in terms of what was being achieved and what was not. With the implementation of the COP21 agreement in Paris, a government-wide approach was needed, along with other key stakeholders, and mechanisms for cooperation in this regard were needed. The Committee also needed to be taken on board with the review of the Climate Change White Paper. He questioned, on the COP21 presentation, what was meant by “MOI” in terms of the review of the adequacy of the global stock take to cover mitigation and adaptation.

Ms Beaumont said there were a number of types of instruments -- for instance, the planning instrument in the form of the medium term strategic framework (MTSF) for the integration of targets related to relative departments. Another actual legal instrument to monitor and track emissions were the reporting regulations under the Air Quality Act, which was gazetted for final public comment of 30 days before finalisation. This required high emitting countries to report against their carbon budgets. Carbon budgets were not yet a legal instrument but would be shortly, and would form part of the tracking instruments. The Climate Act would also assist in the filling in the gaps in the discussion of legal instruments. Adaptation reporting was much more complex because the set of indicators were much more diverse. The DEA was working with sector departments and stakeholders to define national adaptation goals per sector to build into the national adaptation strategy. This was not an exact science, as compared to emission reduction.  

The Chairperson was clear on what the Department was doing. Specific reference had been made to the SA Environment Outlook (SAEO) and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in terms of the outlook of environmental challenges, as outlined in the overview of the Department’s APP. Was this the only authority on issues of the SA environment? For purposes of planning, what was the status of the wetlands currently? Also, what was the current status of GHG emissions? This was particularly in the context of peak, plateau and decline. Was the SA environment continually deteriorating, or were the measures in place arresting this deterioration at a broad level? It would be useful to be informed about this, even if the answer could not be provided immediately.

Ms Ngcaba pointed out that the Department worked off a number of reports to determine the state of air quality, biodiversity etc. This also involved the SA scientific community in assessing the state of a number of areas, and this information was available to be presented to the Committee should it be required. The OECD carried out interesting external assessments which were undertaken by a panel of countries, and this offered the DEA an opportunity for peer review against the performance of other countries in the world. There were other separate reports available, such as the World Bank report on renewables.

If the current investments were not being made on rehabilitating wetlands, matters would be worse off. There was a progressive realisation of some positive outcomes, and deterioration would have been worse if the current interventions were not being made.  At a high-level, there were issues around the deterioration of the environment. There was also a report due to come to Parliament on the Department’s various multilateral agreements – this would be done in April. 

Ms Beaumont added that the international commitment of SA’s emission reduction trajectory range by 2030 would be between 398 and 618 mega tonnes, while the plateau between 2025 and 2035 had to be between 400 and 600 mega tonnes. There was also the GHG inventory to track and monitor emissions. The calculation was to ensure that between now and 2020,2025 and 2030, emissions were slowed down to stay within the 600 mega tonnes threshold. The first round of the calculation had been done and could be presented to Members. 

Mr M Shelembe (NFP) appreciated the work done by DEA. It was clear the Department had adhered to its mandate. His only concern was that the work of the Department involved other relevant sector departments -- how would the cooperation and commitment of these departments be ensured? 

Broadening scope of Committee’s work for 2015/16 and beyond
Mr Makhubele, as Acting Chairperson, explained that the Committee represented Parliament as a whole, and apart from oversight it had other areas of work, including passing legislation, public participation, dealing with the budget and facilitating international relations. The work of Parliament was also informed by section 24 of the Constitution and, more specifically, the work areas of the Department of Environmental Affairs. Work was also informed by the NDP, SDGs and other key issues in relation to the environment. A draft version of the strategic plan would be presented to Members. 

Discussion
Mr Mabilo appreciated that the strategic plan was a work in progress which allowed for Members to provide inputs and comments. He proposed these inputs be considered at the next Committee meeting. He supported the broad thrust already presented.

Mr Hadebe agreed with Mr Mabilo. 

Ms H Kekana (ANC) also supported the initial proposal.

Ms H Nyambi (ANC) agreed that Members should go through the draft strategic plan.

The Acting Chairperson indicated that it would be circulated as a draft.

The meeting was adjourned.